The Z Car's Nemesis?

[Murph]

...hence a lot of the Ferrari GTO and Velo Rosa Spider replicas are built around zeds.

[livenbad]

Back in the day, Datsun Comp was happy to sell suspensions, race cams, racing transmissions with steel syncros, limited slip rear ends, comp brakes, etc. Point being I had (and still have) such a car. It wasn't even the fastest Z in town but it would blow the doors of 911's and Vettes, even big blocks. A friend of mine once told a small block Corvette owner, "you better watch out for that yellow Z, it will outrun the word of god" It would also rip out the rear end VERY easily.

[sblake01]

Sam, you must be bored!

[conedodger]

If your torn between the Z and the 911 I'd say get one of each...

[grnsky]

Great thread,

Always keen on the early history of the Z.

While I love the Z's to death, I am guilty of owning its mentioned rivals including 2 944's and 2 Alfa GTV's, and borrowed a first gen RX7 from one of my friends back in day.

While I loathe the Porsche 'yuppiness' as mentioned, the engineering is phenomenal, and I can say that 944's would easily handle any corner better than the 240Z. Before the wrath comes, I know there is a difference of some 10 years in engineering progress, sits lower, etc so kind of hard to compare. However, and I hate to say it, the confidence in 944 supersedes. Cant speak for 911's.

The Alfa's were really good too. A real drivers car. Reliability....errr. But in a racetrack setting I think the two would match up well. Again in bone stock formats. The Alfa had the twin cam four with twin delottos, so the power difference shouldn't be too bad...

The Rx7 is a little beastie too. My friend had constant problems with the seals I think it was and they go through gas like its nothing. Contender on the track maybe, but not a nemesis.

Just my experiences. But would take a Z any day. :D

[gogriz91]

I thought of the TR6, the RX-7 and early models of the 911/914 as the car's initial nemesis'. I have alot of respect for the 911, the 914 and the RX-7, never was much of a fan of the British roadster scene but they did look like they were fun by no other virtue than being roadsters.

Nissan seemed to take development of the Z in a very different direction with the ZX. I had hoped they would go down a more performance oriented road in the same manner as the 911 but I don't guess they felt their market calling them there. You can't argue with their sales numbers so we're left to wonder what if.

If I could afford the "ownership experience" I would have an 80's era 911 Turbo, they're just dead sexy in my book. That being said when I first saw an S30 on Okinawa in '82, I was in love with the styling, everything else just came later.

Edited September 26, 2010 by gogriz91

[Gary in NJ]

The 911 has never been an "everyman's" sports car, so I don't place it into the same category as the 240Z. I'm sure there wasn't a lot of cross shopping between the two at the time.

In 1970, if you wanted an affordable sports car, you were shopping mostly British brands (that were quite dated at the time), the 914 and perhaps the RX2 or RX3 (if you were "in the know").

The success of the 240Z brought us cars like the TR7 ("the shape of things to come"), RX7 and a bump in sales of the MGB. But by then, the 240Z had begun its metamorphosis into a bloated and smog-conforming GT, resulting in the sports-car insult that was the 280ZX.

[260DET]

"But by then, the 240Z had begun its metamorphosis into a bloated and smog-conforming GT, resulting in the sports-car insult that was the 280ZX."

Amusing comment. Actually in stock form around a race circuit where handling was important a 280ZX at the time was faster than a 240Z, comparable drivers, comparable everything.

[LeonV]

Also, the '79 280ZX was lighter than the '78 280Z. You can't say that about many sports car reiterations. So by that logic, the 280Z was even more of a bloated insult to sports cars.

[sblake01]

This old thread is beginning to drift off topic a bit, and this won't help with that, but even that 'bloated insult' (78 280Z) was faster around a race circuit than a 240Z under the conditions outline in Richard's post.

Edited September 27, 2010 by sblake01

[Gary in NJ]

Amusing comment. Actually in stock form around a race circuit where handling was important a 280ZX at the time was faster than a 240Z, comparable drivers, comparable everything.

A mettle of a sports car (especially those manufactured 30-40 years ago) is not measured with a stop-watch, but by the feedback and "excellence" they return to the driver. By your example, a Toyota Camry is a better sports car then a Mazda Miata.

The 280ZX made good use of 10 years of track time and advances in tire/suspension technology that were unavailable when the S30 was designed in the 1960's.

Also, when the 240Z went on sale in 1969, the average car price was US$3,900; the 240Z was US3,500. In 1980 the average car price was US$7,200; the 10th Anniversary 280ZX was US$14,000. The ZX was clearly designed for a different buyer.

[Carl Beck]

I think it was the same buyer - only now 10 years older. Having lived day to day with the 240Z, the owners wanted better A/C, more heat/sound insulation, better door/window sealing and far better rust/corrosion resistance... Oh yes, and could I have cruise control and power windows please..

Most of these customers weren't actually looking for a better "sports car" so much as they wanted a better daily driver - that was "sporty".

Just look at the modifications made even to 240Z's that the owners want to keep close to stock - they add heat/sound insulation, the do a better job of corrosion protection than original, most of the "want" better A/C...

FWIW,

Carl B.